https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267790 Refund limitation under Section 11B did not apply where the duty had been paid under protest, and the prior finding of protest under Rule 233B was accepted; the Revenue could not later reopen limitation to defeat the claim. Modvat credit already utilised for duty payment could not be restored by reversing RG23A Part II entries after the final product was treated as non-excisable, because the Central Excise framework did not authorise such retrospective restoration. The discussion therefore highlights that refund and credit adjustments must remain within the statutory scheme, and that reversal of utilised credit entries is impermissible absent legal authority. en-us Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Jan 2016 17:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267790 Refund limitation under Section 11B did not apply where the duty had been paid under protest, and the prior finding of protest under Rule 233B was accepted; the Revenue could not later reopen limitation to defeat the claim. Modvat credit already utilised for duty payment could not be restored by reversing RG23A Part II entries after the final product was treated as non-excisable, because the Central Excise framework did not authorise such retrospective restoration. The discussion therefore highlights that refund and credit adjustments must remain within the statutory scheme, and that reversal of utilised credit entries is impermissible absent legal authority. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 30 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267790